About Community Boards - The Land Use Process

Community Boards have a number of ways to shape and manage the development, growth, and future of the community district and the city as a whole. Three land use planning mechanisms specified in the City Charter are discussed here: ULURP, Fair Share, and 197-a Plans. Additionally, the role of the Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA) is reviewed.

The Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP)

Under the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), Community Boards exercise the initial review and assess the community impact of changes in the City's map, amendments to the zoning map, the adoption of special permits, the selection of sites for capital projects, and the granting of franchises. ULURP provides a path and clock for the review of land use applications, from community level scrutiny to the City Council.

Much development that takes place in the city is “as-of-right.” Building single family homes on land set aside, or zoned, for single family homes is an as-of-right build and takes place with little input from the city or community. But when projects are proposed that are not “as-of-right” they must go through ULURP. There is one major exception to this policy: State (and the State’s Authorities like the MTA and Port Authority) and Federal projects are not subject to ULURP.

ULURP (pronounced with a “lurp,” as in burp) items are reviewed on a case by case basis, except in those instances where a 197-a Plan has been developed (see 197-a below). In those instances the Board will consider a ULURP item within the scope established by the 197-a Plan.

ULURP Pre Certification Activities

When the Department of City Planning receives a development application subject to ULURP, it must send it, within five days, to the Community Board and Borough President that have jurisdiction over the land involved.

Internal reviews and checks for completeness then begin at City Planning, including an assessment of whether the proposed action would have an impact on the environment. If a significant impact is identified, the applicant must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). If an EIS is required, each Community Board and Borough President affected by the proposal may send one representative to meetings between the City and the applicant to define the EIS’s scope.

The ULURP Clock Begins

When the Department of City Planning is satisfied that an application is complete and, if necessary, a draft EIS has been submitted, the Department "certifies" the application. There is no time limit for the pre-certification process, since applications differ in both quality and the degree of analysis required. However, if an application has not been certified within six months of filing, the applicant (and in certain cases the Borough President) can appeal to City Planning Commission for certification.

Following certification, the Community Board is sent the complete application and backup material and must within 60 days:

Notify the public of the proposal.
Conduct a public hearing. Public notice about the meeting must be provided via the City's official publication, The City Record, and other local newspapers, fliers, etc. The Community Board must have at least 20 percent, but no fewer than seven, of its members present at the public hearing.
Prepare and submit a written recommendation to the City Planning Commission, the Borough President and the applicant.

The recommendation must be adopted at a public meeting of the Board having a quorum present. The Board's recommendation should include a summary of the public hearing and review the issues raised. A Board can waive the public hearing and choose not to make a recommendation on applications for leases and franchises, if no substantial land use interest is involved.

A Community Board may review an application on land outside its district if it believes the application might significantly affect its welfare. But such a request does not trigger Borough Board review, nor does it affect the ULURP "clock." An application moves to the next review stage when the Community Board with primary jurisdiction acts or when its 60 days are up.

The Borough President has 30 days to review each ULURP application and submit a recommendation or waiver. Its clock begins when the Community Board submits its recommendation, or, if the Community Board does not act, no later than the end of the 60 day period for Community Board review. If a project involves land in more than one community district, the Borough Board may also hold a public hearing and adopt a recommendation within the same 30 days.

Next, the City Planning Commission considers the application and reviews the process to ensure that it has been followed correctly. Within 60 days of the end of the Borough President's review period, the City Planning Commission, after public hearing and discussion, may send its recommendation for approval or modification of the application to the City Council. If City Planning disapproves a ULURP application, the decision is final, except in the following cases:

Disapproved zoning changes are reviewed by the City Council if the Mayor certifies that they are necessary. If the Council votes by a two-thirds majority to approve the change, City Planning is overridden and the change is approved.
State law currently mandates that Urban Renewal Plans must be reviewed by the legislative body, even if they are disapproved by the City Planning Commission.
Triple No - Some types of applications approved by CPC are automatically subject to City Council review, while for other applications, the Council has the option of assuming jurisdiction. Through a process called Triple No, Community Boards and Borough Presidents have a role in requiring Council review of items where that review would ordinarily be optional. If the Community Board and the Borough President both recommend against an application (first and second "no"s), but CPC approves it, the Borough President can file a written objection with the Council and CPC within five days of the CPC vote (the third "no"). The Council must then review the application. For this process to take effect, the Community Board must have held its public hearing and voted in a manner that complies with all ULURP requirements.

The City Council generally has 50 days to review applications, including 20 days to assume jurisdiction when that is required. If the Council wishes to modify an application, it must first refer it back to the City Planning Commission, adding 15 days to the review period.

Council action on land use applications is subject to mayoral veto. A two-thirds vote of the Council can override a veto.

Board of Standards and Appeals Procedure for Zoning Variances

The Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA) has jurisdiction over variances to zoning resolutions and certain special permits. The review procedure for these items roughly follows that of ULURP with the following exceptions:

The Community Board is free to waive a public hearing and recommendation if it wishes. However, if no public hearing is held, no recommendation may be made.
The Community Board reports to the BSA instead of to the City Planning Commission. (It should, however, send a copy of any recommendation to City Planning, since it is a party to all zoning matters before BSA and could help support the Board's position).
The Borough Presidents are not required to review BSA items.
There is no specific timetable for final BSA action on the variance or special permit. Environmental review, therefore, may not be completed until after the Community Board has made its formal recommendation.
The BSA action is final.

Under Section 7221 of the zoning resolution, BSA must make five findings before granting a variance:

That there are "unique physical conditions" inherent in the parcel that would present "practical difficulties" or "unnecessary hardship" in complying strictly with the terms of the zoning resolution.
That because of these physical conditions, the variance is necessary to enable the owner to realize a reasonable return from his property.
That the variance will not alter the "essential character of the neighborhood."
That the "practical difficulties" claimed by the owner as a basis for the variance request are not self-imposed. The purchase of a property with practical difficulties, which the purchaser knows to exist, will not of itself render the difficulties "self-imposed" or prevent the granting of a variance.
That the variance applied for is the minimum necessary to afford relief. Under this finding, the BSA may require the applicant to redesign or cut back the size or type of project proposed.

While the Community Board is in the best position to comment on a variance’s impact on the "essential character of the neighborhood," BSA is limited in its flexibility and must grant a variance if the five findings are met.

The Fair Share Process

Another type of planning in which Community Boards participate is a process for locating city facilities in the district, called Fair Share. Each year, by November 15, the Mayor distributes a Citywide Statement of Needs describing all plans to open, close, expand or reduce the size of City facilities during the next two fiscal years. The Statement identifies the locations of proposed facilities by borough and, if known, by community district. Maps indicating the uses of all City-owned properties in the district accompany the Statement.

Preparation of the Citywide Statement includes consideration of needs identified by City agencies and those identified in Community Board District Needs Statements and budget priorities. (See The Role of Community Boards in the City ‘s Budget Process for more on this.) It also takes into consideration the Criteria for the Location of City Facilities (commonly known as the "Fair Share" criteria), which are designed to further the fair distribution among communities of the burdens and benefits of City facilities.

Each Community Board has 90 days in which to:

make the Citywide Statement of Needs available to the people in the district,
hold a public hearing on the Statement, and ,
submit comments on the Statement to the Department of City Planning.

Although Community Boards are free to comment on any aspect of the Citywide Statement, they often find it most useful to identify those facilities that are best suited to or needed in their districts, and to comment on facilities that would not be appropriate in parts or all of their district, explaining their concerns.

City Planning provides City agencies with copies of Board comments, which the agencies must consider as they develop their facility plans. If the Statement identifies the community district where a facility is slated to go, the Community Board may invite an agency representative to the public hearing. If the community district has not been identified in the Citywide Statement of Needs, the agency must notify the Community Board in which the site is ultimately selected, and offer to meet for discussion. The hearing and any subsequent meetings provide the opportunity for the Community Boards and agencies to discuss ways to make the facility best fit in with the community.

Community Boards convey their comments to their Borough President, who may comment on the Statement of Needs and propose alternate sites for facilities listed in the Statement.

Community Boards sometimes establish a committee to monitor a facility once siting or expansion has been approved. The committee may monitor one or several facilities approved for the district. As an alternative, the responsibility may be given to an existing Board committee. The role of facility monitoring committees is described in the Criteria for the Location of City Facilities.

197-a Planning Process

Section 197-a of the City Charter authorizes community boards and borough boards, as well as the Mayor, the City Planning Commission, the Department of City Planning, and any Borough President, to sponsor plans for the development, growth, and improvement of the city, its boroughs and communities.

Proposed 197-a Plans are reviewed by the affected Community Boards, Borough Presidents, City Planning Commission, and City Council in accordance with the procedures and timetable set out in Rules for the Processing of Plans Pursuant to Charter Section 197-a.

Once approved by the Commission and adopted by the City Council, 197-a plans are published and distributed, together with any modifications made by the Commission and Council, so that they may guide subsequent actions by city agencies. Developing a 197-a Plan is a complex technical task that Community Boards are unable to accomplish without outside support. 197 a. plans are not required and few have been developed. If a 197 a. Plan has been developed, the Board will consider a ULURP item within its scope. Six plans sponsored by community boards and one by a borough president have been adopted to date. For information on these plans see http://home.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/pub/197alis.html.

The 197-a plans for the district can:

Provide greater consistency in land use decision making in the ULURP and Fair Share processes.
Serve as a model with which to compare pending proposals.
Guide developers and others by providing a blueprint of what the Board views as the community's future.

Greenpoint developed a 197-a Plan which was as modified and approved by the City Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council on January 30, 2002. The plan represents a decade-long effort by residents, local community organizations, business leaders and Community Board 1 to fashion a blueprint for how the community's neighborhoods can best be developed, its problems addressed, and its promise achieved. The Plan offers a comprehensive set of recommendations for the community, which includes the East River waterfront with several largely vacant potential redevelopment sites, the industrial Newtown Creek waterfront, Bushwick Inlet, McCarren Park, industrial enclaves and a variety of residential and mixed-use neighborhoods.

The plan's recommendations propose a long-term vision for the Greenpoint community that includes: a publicly accessible waterfront, restoring the housing stock in existing residential neighborhoods, opportunities for new housing, and commercial and light industrial uses in rezoned areas along and upland of the East River waterfront. It also recommends an expanded historic district, revitalized commercial streets, an improved environment, and a high quality of life for its residents and workers. A Community Board that wishes to propose a 197-a Plan must hold a public hearing on it before submitting it, along with a recommendation, to the City Planning Commission. CPC reviews the plan to determine whether it meets established standards and is consistent with sound planning policy.

When the plan and any necessary environmental review (the City will pay for environmental review of plans initiated by a Community Board) are complete, the Department of City Planning forwards it to any other affected Community Boards, the Borough President, and the Borough Board for review and recommendations. Next, CPC holds a public hearing and either approves the plan as is, approves it with modifications, or disapproves it. Approved plans are referred to the City Council for final action, subject to mayoral veto and Council override. The Council may review plans CPC disapproved only if the Mayor requests it. A two-thirds vote of the Council is required to override a mayoral veto or to approve a plan that CPC disapproved.

Community Boards also review 197-a plans for their districts proposed by the Mayor, the City Planning Commission or Department, the Borough Presidents, and the Borough Boards.

CPC is required to consider all approved 197-a Plans in preparing a citywide zoning and planning report to be issued every four years. Queens Community Board 3 has not developed a 197-a Plan nor have any been proposed for it by other organizations.